Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 1 minute ago, NewBornBairn said: I did, from the Institute Of Advanced Fuckers. Three week course and a stiff examination but I'm now qualified. You get one for free if you're an old fucker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Bugger, I've been diddled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim O'Grady Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Just now, Zen Archer said: You get one for free if you're an old fucker. Another waste of the tax payers dollar. Pfft! G-Bo(re) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 16 hours ago, FlyerTon said: Believe it or not, there's around 10,000 monochrome TV licence holders out there (£49 per year) https://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/jan/10/black-and-white-tv-13000-homes Imagine going from a big flat screen 4K HDTV to an antique black and white TV. Should it even still be possible only to use a monochrome rate? Even if you're using a black-and-white TV all signals received would now have to go through a Freeview receiver that was itself transcoding into a oolour signal. It's like when folk had a VHS recorder that could work in colour they still had to have a full whack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 11 hours ago, BigFatTabbyDave said: You and I can argue that their output is awful, but millions would disagree. Presumably if their programming catered to our tastes more, there'd be an even greater number of angry licence fee payers complaining that they miss their programmes. Sky can point to Sky Atlantic all they want, but you have to pay substantially more than the licence fee to get it, so you'd certainly hope that the quality was better. The only problem is that the BBC licence fee is theoretically mandatory, but we seem to have already established that isn't the case in practice. No arguments about C4's news being more confrontational; I'd argue that if the BBC had a similar attitude to their news output, they'd be on the shortlist for privatisation pretty fast, and they know it. As far as it being right wing, you could say that they're not only trying to lean towards the government in order to keep their status, but also to the general public. There's no real argument that Britain doesn't lean to the right at the moment, no matter what we might think about it. It'll be gone soon enough anyway. Not sure that public opinion has turned enough for it to happy quite yet, but I'd be surprised if it was still publicly-owned by the time we have a change of government. You do realise that Channel 4 is publicly owned and that both ITV and Sky's News divisions receive public funding, right? The BBC is not in danger of privatisation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black and White Tragic Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 You do realise that the TV licence detector vans were made to look like they had equipment and had licence detection/enforcement enblazoned on them. They were basically a scare tactic and driven round areas to increase licence take up. "What's that Wee Jimmy, you saw a detector van?". All it would need was the local "Isa" type to find out and it would be all round the estate. Why bother with expensive equipment when you can just buy more fake detection vans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 1 hour ago, Black and White Tragic said: You do realise that the TV licence detector vans were made to look like they had equipment and had licence detection/enforcement enblazoned on them. They were basically a scare tactic and driven round areas to increase licence take up. "What's that Wee Jimmy, you saw a detector van?". All it would need was the local "Isa" type to find out and it would be all round the estate. Why bother with expensive equipment when you can just buy more fake detection vans? I've never seen one of those vans. Can't believe there are still folk who believe they exist and can actually detect signals. Shows just how stupid and gullible people are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogmc Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 I've never seen one of those vans. Can't believe there are still folk who believe they exist and can actually detect signals. Shows just how stupid and gullible people are. Works though look how much money it hoovers up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Don't pay it and they can't do a damn thing about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizfit Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 2 hours ago, DA Baracus said: I've never seen one of those vans. Can't believe there are still folk who believe they exist and can actually detect signals. Shows just how stupid and gullible people are. I seen one years ago driving up the road to crieff. So obviously fake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Just now, kilbowie2002 said: Ive seen plenty of people with warrants issued for non payment, id suggest your advice isnt all encompassing. Its true that they dont have power to enter without a warrant etc, but the suggestion that nothing happens to people who dont pay isnt entirely correct, it might not be common but people do get caught. Only way they can get a warrant is by proving that you watch live broadcasts. Only way they can prove that you watch live broadcasts is if you allow them to enter your property. If they appear at the door, you merely revoke their right to enter the premises or your personal garden space. Record them with a camera at the door and they'll bolt without you even needing to say anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pittsburgh phil Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Only way they can get a warrant is by proving that you watch live broadcasts. Only way they can prove that you watch live broadcasts is if you allow them to enter your property. If they appear at the door, you merely revoke their right to enter the premises or your personal garden space. Record them with a camera at the door and they'll bolt without you even needing to say anything. Or don't answer the door Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 2 minutes ago, pittsburgh phil said: Or don't answer the door But then you can't record them and stick them on youtube for a laugh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 2 minutes ago, kilbowie2002 said: Or if they look in your window and see your tv on. Live in a rise m8, so i'm too high up for them to have a proper peak. Not that I would care, I genuinely don't watch the BBC, it's shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Just now, kilbowie2002 said: Thats fair enough, but im just making the point that standing at the door saying 'youre not coming in' wont always deter them! Then you close the door on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 Kilbowie, obviously I don't want you to get you in trouble, but am I right in saying that as I live one up (unless they have a cherry picker) and I don't let them into my flat, there's basically nothing they can do? There would be absolutely no way they could see my telly from my front door if they did come knocking.I am a licence payer, so obviously just asking for research purposes, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black and White Tragic Posted September 2, 2016 Share Posted September 2, 2016 If a detection van was real and contained thousands of pounds worth of detection equipment (I) they wouldn't want you to see it coming, as you'd turn off your TV, and (II) they wouldn't want it being broken into whilst they were grabbing a steak bake at Greggs.Stealth is the key, if you really are a detection unit.The ones that have the writing on the side are carrying "enforcement" officers who got your address off the computer which says your address doesn't have a licence and therefore, in all probability, you are also using a TV.They'll do exactly the same with iPlayer. They'll ask do you have Internet access. Do you watch video. "Ahhh... you have a device capable of receiving videographic images and there must purchase a TV licence." This will be the same rouse as before, you could watch ITV and Sky but never watch BBC but it was the capability that they nailed you with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 On 02/09/2016 at 12:46, Ad Lib said: You do realise that Channel 4 is publicly owned and that both ITV and Sky's News divisions receive public funding, right? The BBC is not in danger of privatisation. Well, aye, but nobody gives a f**k about Channel 4, as evidenced by them completely ignoring their remit after the channel had been established for a while. I hope you're right, but Is this the same "not in danger of privatisation" that covers the NHS too? 21 hours ago, kilbowie2002 said: Yes I get that, but what im saying is that not everyone has that luxury, basically all they have to do is see that you have a tv capable of receiving the tv signal, so for all those folks with ground level living rooms and the telly by the window then its not as open and shut as your door idea. Im just conscious of the fact some folks on here might get caught out and id not like that to happen unless it was a couple of posters i dont like. Would it be giving them too much warning to ask who you've got lined up for the jail? Asking for a mate, likes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cream Cheese Posted September 3, 2016 Share Posted September 3, 2016 20 hours ago, Black and White Tragic said: but it was the capability that they nailed you with. Which is utterly ridiculous and wouldn't hold up in court in any other kind of situation. Everybody is capable of murder, but we don't all lock each other up. "Capability" and "Doing" are completely different things. I don't see how they can take you to court based on your "capability" and win on that basis. For that reason alone they can f**k right off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jester Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 From a recent visit: Licence Man: Do you have a licence? Me: No, I only watch catch up and downloaded content. I don't watch live TV. Licence Man: Can we come in to check? Me: No. Licence Man: Okay, bye. That's it distilled to its essence. He also asked if I would stop filming him, and that if I posted I online he would hold me liable for any hate threats he received. I would have posted it online for the hell of it but as the sun was at his back the footage was awful... My mate was visited by TV licencing. They asked if they could come in. He told them that as he was classed as a vulnerable person, with the BBC's track record he didn't think it would be appropriate... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.